business," but, to a certain large extent, Government had to regulate business because business was either unable or unwilling to regulate itself. The one way to get rid of "too much Government in business" is to put self-government in business, as the Chamber of Commerce of the United States and the 813 organizations scattered throughout the fortyeight States have undertaken to do.

It is hardly to be doubted that, if American business proves its capacity for self-government, Federal and State Governments will not interfere unduly. It ought to follow that business will not attempt to interfere unduly in the affairs of Government. The right of self-government in business can never be fully established until the right of self-business in Government is conceded.

The Beginning of
Commercial Aviation

HE indications are that the time has

THE

almost arrived when a beginning of commercial aviation will be successfully made in the United States. PostmasterGeneral New has declared that the Government-operated air mail routes should very shortly become carriers of passengers and express parcels. The air mail, he says, can never be put on a self-sustaining basis so long as the planes carry only mail. And he believes that the public is ready to patronize the air mail lines to the extent of giving them passenger and express business.

President Coolidge has looked somewhat further still into the future-but, as he believes, a not distant future. He sees the time approaching when the Government will turn the carrying of air mail over to reliable firms and itself retire from the business of operating planes. The carrying of the mail will constitute a nucleus for the private operation of air routes carrying passengers and freight. The Postal Air Service, he thinks, has demonstrated the efficiency of American fliers and American aircraft, and has thus laid the foundation for successful commercial aviation,

The machinery is already in motion for putting into effect the Aviation Act passed at the recent session of Congress, mainly for the encouragement of commercial aviation. William P. McCracken, Assistant Secretary of Commerce in charge of aviation, has announced the beginning of work on the survey of routes and the marking and

"Bu

UTCHER, baker, poulterer, dairyman, laundryman, all have to pay tribute. I know of a judge his name is a household word-who when on the bench is very hard on cases of bribery, yet his own cook takes discount."

So said a delegate to the Congress on the Prevention of Bribery, held recently in London, describing conditions as they existed in certain parts of the city. He said he did not know a single business which was not honeycombed with bribery, either by discounts or by sending Christmas boxes, or in other ways. "If a tradesman refuses to bribe, the servants find ways to bring him to heel. A parlor maid might leave a window open and so spoil a delicate household plant, or a cook might deliberately take means. to spoil a piece of meat and afterwards complain of it." So the discussion went, and in the end a resolution was put forward in favor of taking some international action to suppress bribery.

The question is certainly one of international importance. For, although in this country, where necessity has proved itself so largely a mother of invention, itself so largely a mother of invention,

and the dearth of domestic help has resulted in the development of the laborsaving device and the exodus from the home to the hotel, the bribery of the domestic servant may be almost eliminated, the same system of petty blackmail is to be found on all hands. From the bootblack to the head waiter, and back again to the bell-hop, tribute is levied and its payment enforced under threat of all manner of petty worries and inconvenience, while bribery for trade extends all the way from the newsboy to the highjacker, round by the Congressman and the Senator, back again to the Italian fruit vender, who pays Danegeld to safeguard his pitch from invasion.

Quite apart from the fundamental immorality of the practice, it is, of course, the consumer in the widest sense of the word who always pays. As the representative to the London Congress justly put it, "The practice of making it necessary for tradesmen to pay bribes to get custom results in raising prices, for if a shopkeeper is bled by the cook or the butler he must recoup himself, either by charging extra or by sending short weight."

Six Dollars a Day

TE

HERE appeared recently the follow-
ing newspaper headline:

U. S. TRAVEL ALLOWANCE INCREASED
TO $6 DAILY

That is the work of General H. M. Lord, Director of the Budget, assisted by the Federal Traffic Board. But it may not stand. Comptroller-General McCarl has still to pass upon it, and he will not pass upon it until some Federal employee submits an expense account under the new regulations, and the new regulations do not go into effect until October 1. In fact, the czar of Federal finances will not pass upon this point until long after many employees have submitted expense accounts. Each employee who travels will submit his expense account to the disbursing officer of his own department. He will get the money-and spend it. Then the account will go through dark, deep, devious channels until, in the course of months, or maybe years, it will come up from that "cavern measureless to man" to the bright light of McCarl's flat-top desk. And he will, perhaps, disapprove it. There will be some thousands of others like it. Thousands of employees, in order to make up the difference between six dollars a day and four dollars a day, will have to re

fund millions of dollars that they have already spent.

ac

Despite all that, there must be a glorious feeling of elation among the thousands of Federal employees who travel— a feeling of freedom and ease and affluence because they are to have the princely sum of six dollars a day for traveling expenses. They have had four dollars a day, and no more, since the good old days when a breakfast of bacon and eggs and rolls and coffee-with cereal if wanted-could be bought for fifteen cents and an all-around good dinner for a quarter. Those were the days when Government salaries were counted large, when men scrambled mightily for them, when of those who got them "few died and none resigned." But things have been different these years back. Instead of a few good jobs, there came to be a host of poor ones. The Federal employee who stayed in Washington could barely scrimp through, and the one who traveled-well, possibly he had friends along the way who would invite him to dinner occasionally, and, if he planned his trip perfectly, he could spend most of the nights on a Pullman car and pay for the accommodations with a Government green slip. Even so, some died and a few resigned. lodging left out of account, four dollars would not buy "three squares" with anything left over for tips to waiters and porters and other incidental inevitables.

With

That fine old phrase, "the full dinnerpail," has dropped out of Republican nomenclature these latter years, but it is good to know that the idea persists and that a Republican Administration wants to fill the Federal traveler's pail, if not full, at least to the rim. But then there is McCarl, and he is not beholden to Republican or Democrat, Congress or President, man or devil. He has his job for a term of fifteen years, apparently cannot be removed, evidently does not expect to be reappointed, and does as he pleases with Government accounts. Economy and the Camel

the railroad station is a mile or more from the hotel or if the Weather Bureau records show that it was raining at that particular place on that particular day. Whether or not he will ever allow a bill. for drinking-water in the Orient remains to be seen.

Our Vice-Consul in Rangoon, Burma, recently submitted such a bill. That That Vice-Consul, apparently, had not been attending to his business. A Vice-Consul ought to read statistical reports, of his own and possibly of other Governments. But this one, apparently, read Kipling. Perhaps he first went astray because, being in Burma, he wanted to know about the attractions of Burma and, just possibly, about that Burma girl whose "petticut was yallar" and whose "little cap was green." But he did not stop with reading "Mandalay." Perhaps he thumbed the pages idly until he came to that camel ballad, and he must have read it to the bitter last line "But 'e gets into the drinkin' casks, and then o' course we dies."

No matter about the details. Our Vice-Consul at Rangoon went out and bought some bottled water to drink. In the course of time-not having drunk of the camel-he submitted an expense account of $11.20 for bottled water. Comptroller-General McCarl disapproved the item, and the Vice-Consul will have to refund $11.20 to the Treasury of the United States. And, presumably, he will have to drink in the future from the native water casks, camel or not. The Comptroller-General camel or not. The Comptroller-General of the United States has ruled that water which is good enough for the native population of Rangoon is good enough for the American Vice-Consul resident there -or words tantamount thereto.

Economy, Governmental and personal, is a problem for everybody else in Washington. For Comptroller-General McCarl it is apparently as simple as A B C. Revolt Against the Primary

be glad to see the primary go by the board. While they may know that they can control primaries, they have not forgotten that they used to control conventions. The bosses would probably like to see a return to the convention system without safeguards. The popular demand is for a system differing from both the primary and the convention in that it would be, so far as possible, protected against the undue use of money and influence. The battle between the bosses and the people will be fought in the legislative chambers.

The primary is a direct issue in several States and an indirect issue in many others. In New Jersey the Republicans are outspoken for abandonment of the primary, while the Democrats would retain it. In Indiana the situation is reversed. The Democrats have pronounced flatly for primary repeal. In Ohio an initiative petition is to be submitted for a constitutional amendment abolishing the primary. There is no apparent party line-up for and against it. In Illinois the primary law has been declared unconstitutional and the question of what is to be substituted is an issue in the campaign preceding the November elections.

In most of the States the issue will come between individual candidates for legislative seats rather than between parties. The fact that such contests are imminent in many States is indicated by an appeal recently sent out by "Labor," the organ of the railroad workers of the La Follette school. "Labor" still favors the primary and calls upon its readers to stem the tide of anti-primary sentiment by defeating candidates for legislative seats who favor repeal of primary laws. "Labor" declares that it is the politicians, and not the people, who are "plotting to amend or repeal the primary."

The alignment for and against primary reform threatens to be somewhat motley. The labor groups represented by "Labor"-if they are represented by that journal-are opposed to any change in existing primary laws. Indications are that certain Anti-Saloon League leaders also oppose any change. Yet these labor groups and these Anti-Saloon League officials do not love one another or work toward the same ends.

The most serious question in the primary reform movement is: How can the reform be accomplished without playing into the hands of machine politicians

Still a Mystery

O

N another page we present an article dealing with the mystery of the brig "Marie Celeste," written by Dr. Oliver W. Cobb, a cousin of Captain Briggs, of that vessel. The theory he advances is, it seems to us, plausible and has been held also, we are told, by Captain Winchester, owner of the brig, and

by Arthur S. Briggs, a surviving son of Captain Briggs. A similar theory was advanced by Captain Boyce, of the Dei Gratia, the vessel which brought in the abandoned brig, but he inclined to think that the cause of abandonment was fear lest the vessel was about to strike a rocky and dangerous coast.

We recently retold the yarn spun by "John Pemberton" to a writer in "Chambers's Journal." Since then we have read the Triggs version of which Dr. Cobb speaks, and have also seen a long and interestingly illustrated article in the Boston "Post" of August 8 last, which is in part an interview with Captain Briggs's son. He declares, "There is not a word of truth in Pemberton's story." This assertion is supported by known facts that flatly contradict John, the cook. For instance, the piano, which, according to John, broke away and killed the captain's wife, turns out to be a portable melodeon, still in existence (John said the captain threw the piano overboard); John gives a list of the crew, not one name in which is on the owner's list, not even his own; he puts the number of the crew at ten, whereas it was actually eight; he says that the cargo was oil and lumber, whereas it was alcohol. And so on.

When we expressed the hope that John's story wasn't true, we might have adduced as one reason the fact that it threw an aspersion on Captain Boyce, whose narrative was fully accepted by the owner of the brig and the relatives of Captain Briggs. As for Triggs's remarkable tale, a reading in view of the known facts would lead almost any one to believe that the captain of the British navy who repeated it must have been the innocent victim of a sailor's love for yarning. Triggs, for instance, gives the brig two boats, whereas she had only one, another having been smashed before sailing.

Even the brig's name has gone down

mystery. She was the Mary Celeste; Conan Doyle seems to have rechristened her "Marie Celeste" in an exciting short story.

The mystery remains unsolved so far as proof goes; for even if we accept the best theories as to this sea tragedy,

As

s readers multiply, the duty of the critic of literature increases in importance. There never was a time when there was such need of informed and skillful guides to sound literary taste and judgment. For that reason the death of Stuart P. Sherman is a serious loss to America. There are writers on books who can express in clever phrase their feelings evoked by their reading. They sometimes entertain the reader and sometimes whet his appetite for literature; but they do not train the judg: ment of the reader or give him the means of training his own judgment. There are other writers on books who bring to their reading a knowledge of what is best in the past and a wellconceived understanding of the principles which underlie all fine art. These are the real guides that a literate people need and find all too rare. It was among these few that Dr. Sherman be

longed. Whether agreeing with his judgments or not, one always had re

spect for the knowledge and understanding on which they were based. And Dr. Sherman expressed his judgments in a style that was always interesting and was often keen and witty. A native of Vermont, a graduate of Williams College, a Master of Arts and Doctor of Philosophy of Harvard, Dr. Sherman was for eighteen years a teacher of English, first at Northwestern University and then at the University of Illinois. In 1924 he became literary editor of the New York "Herald Tribune." On another page in this issue his most recent book is reviewed by the editor of the Book Table in words which, written before Dr. Sherman's sudden death of heart failure after a canoe accident, convey in the very expression of hope for the long continuance of his future service to letters some sense of what American critical literature has lost.

Death and Headlines

THE

HE same daily papers that told of the passing of Charles W. Eliot told also of the death of Valentino, king of movie romances. It is a strange commentary upon our standards of proportion that in many instances the news of Valentino's death spread itself across three, four, and even eight columns of news print, while the death of America's foremost educator was given but the space of a single column. At least in the editorial pages of the press the balance came near to being restored, for the writers of editorials, if not the writers of headlines, measure the death of President Eliot as the larger event.

But perhaps it is not so strange that the death of a man who came to this country as a young and impoverished Italian and who, in little more than a decade, won his way to pre-eminence in the screen world should be considered as news of portentous size. The language which he spoke has aptly been called the "Esperanto of the eye"-a language as valid in the heart of China as in the movie palaces of Broadway. The thoughts of President Eliot were cast in no such universal code. Why grow cynical over the standards of our generation when even the writers of headlines are aware that the space they grant for the melancholy triumph of a dead actor celebrates only the termination of his fame? There will be time in the future

to measure the achievements and count the victories of men of the mold of Charles W. Eliot.

The Second Founder of Harvard

F any people should be judged by their best, the Puritans of New England can be understood only in the light of such a life as that of President Eliot. Certainly there was beauty, suavity, and symmetry in a culture under which his character came to flower. It is customary to speak of Puritanism as hard, austere, narrow, intolerant, unhappy; as indeed the denial of those ideals commonly called Grecian; but Charles William Eliot, son of the Puritans and student of the natural sciences, was perhaps the most conspicuous example in our day and Nation of that balance of character, that orderliness of mind, that capacity for serene enjoyment, which men associate with the Greek ideal. The end of his life, which came on Sunday of last week, at Northeast Harbor, on the island of Mount Desert in Maine, befitted the rest of it. It was the rounding out, the full completion of his years and his service.

If a nation is to be judged by the men it honors, America cannot rightly be understood without some knowledge of the man who was widely, almost universally, regarded as the Republic's first citizen. Sometimes it is thought with reason that America, as compared with the Old World, is underbred, undignified, prone to extremes of materialistic self-seeking and idealistic sentimentalism; but, whatever the defects of the American people may be, they have the capacity to recognize the leadership of one who was distinguished for his breeding, dignity, and poise.

At the age of thirty-two Mr. Eliot deliberately chose the profession of teaching. Perhaps he had made his choice before this; but it was then that he put the choice to the test by declining a remunerative position as mill superintendent. Three years later he became President of Harvard. What he accomplished in his Presidency was virtually the creation of the University that now is. That it is the greatest of American universities is due, not only to its inheritance, but also to its development under President Eliot. He may truly be said to have founded it anew. His achievement was thus summarized in this jour

nal in an editorial when his resignation was announced in 1908:

During those forty years Harvard had grown from a Unitarian college to an unsectarian university, from an undergraduate population numbering 423 on the average in the five years 1861-5, to a scholastic community numbering 6,000, with as many teachers in 1908 as it had undergraduate pupils in 1868. Then it was little known outside of New England, now wherever Anglo-Saxon culture has found a residence; then, apart from its professional schools, its curriculum was mainly Latin, Greek, mathematics, and a little science, now there is no branch of liberal learning which it does not include; then it was a higher school whose President stood to the students in loco parentis, now as essentially a self-governing community as any in America; then with standards of graduation probably little if any higher than its standards of admission now; then dominated by a coercive institutional religion, now by a spirit of free individual religion in which all forms of faith and worship are alike welcome.

It has sometimes been said that, in bringing about the change thus summarized his greatest contribution was in the development of what is known as the elective system. As a matter of fact, the elective system was simply an outward manifestation of President Eliot's faith in liberty as a fundamental in education, He did not believe in liberty for its own sake. He had no use for the kind of education that makes a fetish of "selfexpression." To him liberty was simply the element in which the will must live and grow. To him education was not reading, writing, and arithmetic, or their reading, writing, and arithmetic, or their modern equivalents. It was not a device to make a democracy safe by educating its voters, or a nation secure by making its soldiers intelligent, or a people prosperous by making workers efficient; it was a means and a necessary means to make happiness general, to spread among the people "the enjoyment of the solid, human satisfactions."

Education, therefore, to him was a process "that lasts through life." It was directed toward efficiency, but only in the sense of that efficiency that makes for happiness. In an article published in The Outlook twenty-one years ago last July and delivered as an address before the Schoolmasters' Association of New York he expressed this idea of the efficient life in these words:

Efficiency is the great source of private happiness and of public prosper

of

ity-the exercise of power intelligently and with enjoyment. Is not that true of the life of every person here? Do we not all get our real satisfactions through efficiency, including, course, in efficiency its condition, physical and moral health, and its results, productiveness and serviceableness? Is not our own personal healthy efficiency in labor and service the groundwork of our content with life?

To promote this efficiency he found one essential process in the development of the individual's will power. This he found to be possible not by compulsion but by the exercise of freedom. In education, therefore, Mr. Eliot was primarily a liberator.

But it was not to formal education that Mr. Eliot dedicated himself. It may be said that the Presidency of Har vard was, after all, an incident, though by all odds the chief incident, in a career that was given to the whole sphere of education in its widest sense. His selection of such master works of literature as he regarded conducive to a broad view of life which were collected and published as the "Harvard Classics,” his addresses before various gatherings on the widest variety of subjects from the politics of the day to religious ideals, and from the application of democracy to industry to the discussion of contemporary manners, and his many other public activities, made him a teacher of teachers, a leader of those ambitious to lead, a provoker of thought, a professor at large, and adviser and consultant to all who were busied with the affairs of the mind, from the humblest teacher in the lower grades of the common schools to the President of the United States.

And throughout his life he practiced what he preached. He found in his work "the durable satisfactions of life." He not only had no faith in arbitrary authority of ideas, whether educational, religious, or political, but never sought to exercise it himself. It was characteristic of him, for instance, that when he went before a legislative committee in Massachusetts to oppose the taxation of college property he did not speak with authority as one who knew what was right and was telling non-experts what conclusions they should reach, but rather laid before that body certain facts from which they could draw their conclusions as well as he. So when he discussed religious questions, as he often did, he was often apothegmatic but never dogmatic. He took pains to explain and define his terms. When he